|
Post by wilmywood8455 on Jun 6, 2022 6:43:15 GMT -8
Formula 1’s return in 2022 to a design based on the ground effect concept brought to the surface a phenomenon already known and long forgotten in Formula 1. It is the now known porpoising, triggered by the progressive lowering of the car body to the ground under the thrust of the aerodynamic load as speed increases. Below a height limit from the ground, the air flow enters a critical condition that causes a sudden loss of downforce, causing the car to stand up and regain load. The cycle thus has a new beginning, giving life to the repeated vertical oscillations visible from the outside. The aerodynamic rebound has been at the center of the technical discussions since the beginning of the season, given the implications on the car’s balance of power. Porpoising caught all teams off guard due to the difficulty in replicating the phenomenon in the wind tunnel and in a virtual environment. The teams have invested a lot of resources to stem the problem, given its complications that extend beyond mere concerns about vibration and reliability. The aerodynamic rebound is in fact associated with an inconsistent load level, which destabilizes the car and reduces the grip available on the tires when cornering and braking. Pending specific aerodynamic updates aimed at fixing the phenomenon, its prevention has been entrusted solely to the set-up choices and in particular to the mechanical ones. The increase in the height from the ground and the stiffening of the suspensions have proved to be useful tools to keep the bouncing beyond a certain limit, however suffering a considerable loss of load generated by the floor and therefore a loss in terms of performance.
|
|
|
Post by mmi16 on Jun 6, 2022 12:33:03 GMT -8
Formula 1’s return in 2022 to a design based on the ground effect concept brought to the surface a phenomenon already known and long forgotten in Formula 1. It is the now known porpoising, triggered by the progressive lowering of the car body to the ground under the thrust of the aerodynamic load as speed increases. Below a height limit from the ground, the air flow enters a critical condition that causes a sudden loss of downforce, causing the car to stand up and regain load. The cycle thus has a new beginning, giving life to the repeated vertical oscillations visible from the outside. The aerodynamic rebound has been at the center of the technical discussions since the beginning of the season, given the implications on the car’s balance of power. Porpoising caught all teams off guard due to the difficulty in replicating the phenomenon in the wind tunnel and in a virtual environment. The teams have invested a lot of resources to stem the problem, given its complications that extend beyond mere concerns about vibration and reliability. The aerodynamic rebound is in fact associated with an inconsistent load level, which destabilizes the car and reduces the grip available on the tires when cornering and braking. Pending specific aerodynamic updates aimed at fixing the phenomenon, its prevention has been entrusted solely to the set-up choices and in particular to the mechanical ones. The increase in the height from the ground and the stiffening of the suspensions have proved to be useful tools to keep the bouncing beyond a certain limit, however suffering a considerable loss of load generated by the floor and therefore a loss in terms of performance.
The stiffer spring rates are creating back issues for the drivers with the repeated impacts they are getting from the phenomenon.
|
|
|
Post by mikey on Jun 6, 2022 13:32:00 GMT -8
Formula 1’s return in 2022 to a design based on the ground effect concept brought to the surface a phenomenon already known and long forgotten in Formula 1. It is the now known porpoising, triggered by the progressive lowering of the car body to the ground under the thrust of the aerodynamic load as speed increases. Below a height limit from the ground, the air flow enters a critical condition that causes a sudden loss of downforce, causing the car to stand up and regain load. The cycle thus has a new beginning, giving life to the repeated vertical oscillations visible from the outside. The aerodynamic rebound has been at the center of the technical discussions since the beginning of the season, given the implications on the car’s balance of power. Porpoising caught all teams off guard due to the difficulty in replicating the phenomenon in the wind tunnel and in a virtual environment. The teams have invested a lot of resources to stem the problem, given its complications that extend beyond mere concerns about vibration and reliability. The aerodynamic rebound is in fact associated with an inconsistent load level, which destabilizes the car and reduces the grip available on the tires when cornering and braking. Pending specific aerodynamic updates aimed at fixing the phenomenon, its prevention has been entrusted solely to the set-up choices and in particular to the mechanical ones. The increase in the height from the ground and the stiffening of the suspensions have proved to be useful tools to keep the bouncing beyond a certain limit, however suffering a considerable loss of load generated by the floor and therefore a loss in terms of performance.
The stiffer spring rates are creating back issues for the drivers with the repeated impacts they are getting from the phenomenon. Many years ago I watched a 4-wheel off-road show, I had a '41 Willys Jeep at the time, and they talked about both compression of spring as the tire went down towards the ground and also the spring rate as it rebounded off the bumps...wouldn't it be fairly simple to do a test to find the point where the vehicle stops porpoising? I mean they have mule cars running this that and everything else and there's no reason they can't do that too to find a happy spot. In the story I saw they also talked about how Cadillac used it to smooth out their rides as well. Now I do realize that we are probably talking a millimeter or few here or there but still.
|
|
|
Post by mmi16 on Jun 6, 2022 14:43:46 GMT -8
The stiffer spring rates are creating back issues for the drivers with the repeated impacts they are getting from the phenomenon. Many years ago I watched a 4-wheel off-road show, I had a '41 Willys Jeep at the time, and they talked about both compression of spring as the tire went down towards the ground and also the spring rate as it rebounded off the bumps...wouldn't it be fairly simple to do a test to find the point where the vehicle stops porpoising? I mean they have mule cars running this that and everything else and there's no reason they can't do that too to find a happy spot. In the story I saw they also talked about how Cadillac used it to smooth out their rides as well. Now I do realize that we are probably talking a millimeter or few here or there but still. One other thing to remember, also changed this year was the wheel diameter and the sidewall section for the tires. The 2022 tires have less sidewall than the 2021 tires. Less sidewall gives the tires themselves a much higher spring rate than the 2021 tire with their larger sidewall. The spring rate of the tires adds into the spring rate of the car itself to create the total spring rate - a over all spring rate that has to be controlled with the dampers.
|
|
|
Post by wilmywood8455 on Jun 6, 2022 14:46:19 GMT -8
Many years ago I watched a 4-wheel off-road show, I had a '41 Willys Jeep at the time, and they talked about both compression of spring as the tire went down towards the ground and also the spring rate as it rebounded off the bumps...wouldn't it be fairly simple to do a test to find the point where the vehicle stops porpoising? I mean they have mule cars running this that and everything else and there's no reason they can't do that too to find a happy spot. In the story I saw they also talked about how Cadillac used it to smooth out their rides as well. Now I do realize that we are probably talking a millimeter or few here or there but still. One other thing to remember, also changed this year was the wheel diameter and the sidewall section for the tires. The 2022 tires have less sidewall than the 2021 tires. Less sidewall gives the tires themselves a much higher spring rate than the 2021 tire with their larger sidewall. The spring rate of the tires adds into the spring rate of the car itself to create the total spring rate - a over all spring rate that has to be controlled with the dampers. Yes but the taller sidewall had much more deflection that the dampers could not control, so the shorter sidewall should be a plus, not a negative.
|
|
|
Post by mmi16 on Jun 6, 2022 15:07:45 GMT -8
One other thing to remember, also changed this year was the wheel diameter and the sidewall section for the tires. The 2022 tires have less sidewall than the 2021 tires. Less sidewall gives the tires themselves a much higher spring rate than the 2021 tire with their larger sidewall. The spring rate of the tires adds into the spring rate of the car itself to create the total spring rate - a over all spring rate that has to be controlled with the dampers. Yes but the taller sidewall had much more deflection that the dampers could not control, so the shorter sidewall should be a plus, not a negative. No matter how well 'controlled' the overall higher spring rate still transfers more energy into the driver.
|
|
|
Post by wilmywood8455 on Jun 7, 2022 1:20:07 GMT -8
Yes but the taller sidewall had much more deflection that the dampers could not control, so the shorter sidewall should be a plus, not a negative. No matter how well 'controlled' the overall higher spring rate still transfers more energy into the driver. I'm not so sure that the overall springs rates are that much higher due to the tires. Seems to me that they may be higher in order to help minimize the porpoising, but that is a different issue.
What astounds me is that MBZ left their newly raised overall spring rates high at Monaco which reportedly caused issues there, rather than lowering them back down since the higher speeds associated with the porpoising issues are not present at Monaco. That seems pretty stupid to me.
|
|
jmjgt
Member
Posts: 3,311
|
Post by jmjgt on Jun 7, 2022 12:13:32 GMT -8
Merc says they have the porpoising under control but the further need of high spring rates tells me the ride height is still critical to the point where they can't run the usual soft spring/high ride heights usually seen at Monaco, i'm a bit skeptical. Baku's long straight will be a good indication of whether their problems are truly behind them, they're not making happy noises about their prospect right now though.
|
|